California AI Chatbot Law: What Adam’s Law and SB 867 Mean for Kids

California has enacted two new laws aimed at AI products used by children, but they regulate very different things.

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed SB 867 and SB 1119, known as Adam’s Law, on September 10. SB 867 places a temporary moratorium on manufacturing or selling certain AI companion-chatbot toys for children under 16. Adam’s Law imposes legal requirements on companies operating AI companion chatbots used by minors.

“SB 867” prohibits the manufacture, sale, exchange, or retail offering of a toy that includes a companion chatbot until January 1, 2031, while “SB 1119” establishes a regulatory framework governing companion chatbots used by children, according to the California legislation and Governor Newsom’s signing announcement.

What Adam’s Law Requires

Adam’s Law requires companies operating AI companion chatbots used by minors to conduct risk assessments before introducing new or substantially updated chatbot designs and document potential harms to children.

The law also requires independent safety audits to be submitted to the state attorney general. Companies must establish crisis protocols for situations involving suicidal ideation or self-harm, provide parental controls and notify parents when a child disables certain safety settings.

“SB 1119 … would establish a robust oversight and enforcement framework, including a public incident reporting mechanism, third-party audits, auditing standards developed by the Attorney General, and a private right of action,” according to the California Senate Judiciary Committee’s analysis of the bill.

That moves child-safety requirements beyond internal company policies. A chatbot operator that fails to comply can face legal consequences outside the company’s own safety-review process. The law takes effect in 2027.

Its name comes from Adam Raine, a 16-year-old from Orange County who died by suicide in 2024 after conversations with ChatGPT about his mental health. His parents have sued OpenAI, alleging negligence and wrongful death. His father has told a U.S. Senate Judiciary subcommittee that the chatbot offered to help write a suicide note and assisted his son in researching suicide methods.

Steve Padilla’s office, which said the law was developed following concerns about the risks posed by AI companion chatbots to children. The Raine family’s allegations against OpenAI remain part of litigation rather than an established finding of causation.

“OpenAI supports California Senate Bill 1119, legislation that establishes meaningful safeguards for how young people use AI,” wrote Ann O’Leary, OpenAI’s vice president of Global Policy, on August 31. OpenAI said SB 1119 would establish safeguards while preserving young people’s access to AI tools.

SB 867 Targets AI Toys

“This bill would, until January 1, 2031, prohibit the manufacture, sale, exchange, possession with intent to sell or exchange, and exposition or offer for sale or exchange to a retailer a toy … that includes a companion chatbot,” according to the enrolled SB 867 text.

The measure is also not aimed at every toy that happens to use artificial intelligence. Its focus is on products designed for sustained, adaptive, human-like conversation with children.

Supporters pointed to research involving AI-enabled toys that raised concerns about inappropriate responses, including interactions involving dangerous household objects and sexually explicit material.

The four-year-plus moratorium gives California time to develop safety standards for the category rather than allowing the market to expand without specific rules governing these products.

What Changes For Parents?

A covered AI companion toy marketed to a child under 16 cannot be manufactured or sold in California during the SB 867 moratorium. The restriction runs until January 1, 2031, unless lawmakers change the law before then.

Children using AI companion chatbots through apps or other services face a different set of rules. Under Adam’s Law, the companies operating those systems will have obligations involving risk assessments, independent audits, parental controls and responses to self-harm concerns once the law takes effect.

A toy manufacturer faces a direct restriction on a specific product category. A chatbot operator can continue offering its service to minors, but must meet a set of ongoing safety requirements. The legal exposure under Adam’s Law is the bigger long-term change.

California’s AI Ban Comes With A Lawsuit Clause

The two measures were part of a larger package of 13 bills signed by Newsom on September 10. The package also addresses social-media features such as autoplay and algorithmic feeds for users under 16, AI-generated child sexual-abuse material and the use of K-12 student data in AI systems.

Newsom’s office has described the package as the nation’s strongest child-safety framework for chatbots and social media. That is the state’s characterization, rather than an independent ranking.

The laws have also drawn criticism from digital-rights groups. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has raised concerns about provisions elsewhere in California’s child-safety package, particularly measures involving age verification and their potential privacy and speech implications.

SB 867 temporarily keeps a defined class of AI companion toys off California’s market. Adam’s Law does something more lasting: it places continuing obligations on chatbot operators and gives families a legal route to challenge violations.

That private right of action is the provision most likely to change how companies approach child safety. Safety measures that were previously handled largely as internal policy decisions can now carry direct legal consequences when the law takes effect.